Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Identifies key urban assets for effective recovery in multi-hazard scenarios, suggesting improved planning strategies.
For recovery to be effective and efficient, proactive measures such as strengthening the resilience of important urban assets must be implemented before disaster strikes. However, existing approaches fail to account for potential consecutive disaster impacts, the transformational changes that happen as a result of the disaster, and the shifting role of urban assets in post-disaster environments. This study presents a methodological framework to support pre-disaster recovery planning in urban areas exposed to multi-hazard risks, namely earthquakes followed by floods. In this study, we develop a methodological framework using a graph-based analytical approach to assess the importance of buildings, roads, census blocks, and temporary shelter areas in urban areas. This method focuses on capturing how the importance of urban assets shifts after consecutive disaster events. Applied to Sanremo, Italy, the methodological framework reveals the vulnerabilities associated with centralized urban planning and a notable mismatch between residential density and the distribution of important assets. The findings underscore how network disruptions and consecutive disasters impact urban connectivity, highlighting the urgent need for decentralized planning and adaptable disaster risk reduction strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mohammadi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: